Questions unanswered in tuition bill

Posted:
01/22/2013 06:28:27 PM MST

Reporter-Herald Editorial

No one would argue that a young child brought illegally into the United States by his parents is at fault for being in the country illegally.

It is likely that the parents' decision was driven out of economic need. And just as the child benefits from his parents being able to provide for him in a way they might not otherwise be able to in their home country, he also benefits from the institutions established in this country, such as the public school system.

But as this child grows into adulthood in his adopted homeland, he is unfortunately out of place -- the citizen of an unfamiliar country and the illegal resident of a country that is his home. So, the time comes when, despite acclimation to customs and language and the acquirement of knowledge and skills, the young man cannot be legally employed and can no longer benefit from a subsidized education.

To address this problem, again this year, Colorado legislators are seeking a way to provide children brought to this country illegally the tuition subsidy afforded in-state residents, so long as these students have applied or plan to apply for legal residency as soon as they are able. The goal is to see that these students continue in their studies.

It's a noble effort, helping both the students and society, which benefits from a well-educated workforce. But again, this idea leaves questions that need to be answered before the Colorado Legislature should move forward.

First of all, what about the employment problem? This in-state tuition bill would not guarantee that a graduate would be able to work legally in the state -- only that he has applied or plans to apply for legal residency -- thus leaving the graduate without a means of paying back any student loans, should he have them. If he wanted to get a job in his chosen field, it likely would not be in Colorado.

Second is the fairness factor. What about legal Colorado residents who still cannot qualify for in-state tuition? One example would be a adult student who leaves the state to earn a degree, then returns, but cannot get in-state tuition for any continuing education without first meeting a minimum residency requirement, regardless of how many years the student lived in the state previously. Another would be a student who grew up in Colorado but whose parents move to a neighboring state while he was in high school. Can that student come back to his home state and pay in-state tuition, since his leaving was not his decision?

If the Legislature can come up with a bill that also helps other disadvantaged students, then it likely will find more public support. Lawmakers must also remember that going to college is still legal for every student. It's just the cost that changes. And nothing prohibits a person for seeking legal residency before seeking an education.